The App Is the Boss — And It’s Deepening Inequality in New York

Gig work is often sold as freedom. Work when you want. Be your own boss. Make money on your own schedule.

But for many New Yorkers, that’s not what the job actually looks like.

Our recent survey of gig workers across New York State shows something very different: work that is closely managed by the app itself—and shaped by the same economic and racial inequalities in the broader labor market.

As part of the Community Service Society’s 2025 Annual Survey of Housing and Economic Security, we surveyed 4,000 adult New Yorkers statewide. One in five reported earning money through gig platforms in the past year. For half of those workers, gig work is their main source of income.

Gig work is not evenly distributed. Workers of color are more likely to rely on it, reflecting long-standing disparities in access to stable jobs. And when workers have fewer options, they have less room to say no.

That lack of choice makes algorithmic control more powerful. Nearly four in five gig workers told us that apps push them to work longer or at specific times through alerts, bonuses, and other incentives. Seventy percent said the app controls when, where, and how much they work.

The app is always watching, always measuring, always adjusting.

That can mean chasing a bonus late into the night or worrying that one bad rating could affect tomorrow’s earnings. Workers are left responding to signals from a system they cannot see.

This is what gig work looks like in practice. And it is structured in ways that deepen inequality.

Take pay. Pay shifts based on time, location, demand, and behavior, pushing workers to continuously adjust their schedules to keep up.

For workers already facing financial insecurity—as many gig workers are—this volatility has real consequences. It makes it harder to plan, save, or say no. Algorithmic systems extract more labor under pressure.

Or take surveillance. Nearly seven in ten workers say they feel constantly monitored. Their location and behavior are tracked and used to determine who gets work.

Then there are ratings. Two-thirds of gig workers are concerned that customer ratings reflect bias based on race, gender, or language. Workers know those ratings affect their pay, job access, and ability to keep working.

Even access to work itself can disappear without warning. For workers relying on this income, even a short disruption can have immediate consequences.

And yet workers are clear about what they want. More than three-quarters say they would feel more secure if the government set rules for how apps treat workers.

New York City has already taken steps by setting minimum pay standards for delivery workers and requiring basic protections when workers are removed from platforms. These are important gains, but they are not yet statewide, and do not yet address the core issue: how apps control the work itself.

That means setting standards in five key areas—starting with pay. Workers need transparency into how earnings are calculated. Platforms should be required to disclose how compensation works and give advance notice before changes take effect.

Second, there must be limits on surveillance and data use. Platforms track workers constantly and use that data to shape access to work. Without guardrails, monitoring becomes a tool of control.

Third, rating and assignment systems need oversight. Left unchecked, they can embed discrimination into how work is distributed. Platforms should be required to assess and address bias and give workers a way to challenge unfair outcomes.

Fourth, workers need basic due process when decisions affect their ability to earn. Access to work can be reduced—or cut off—through automated systems, often with little explanation. Workers should have the right to know why decisions are made and to appeal to them before losing their income.

Finally, workers need a voice in the systems that govern their work. Platforms regularly change how pay, assignments, and performance are structured, with no input from the people affected. Ensuring ongoing oversight means creating mechanisms for worker representation.

Gig work is often framed as a tradeoff between flexibility and stability. But that framing misses what workers are actually describing. The defining feature of gig work today is control—exercised through systems that operate out of view and reproduce existing inequality.

If New York is going to respond effectively, it has to regulate algorithmic systems. Because right now, the app is the boss.